https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419848 A statutory development authority engaged in planned urban development, housing, roads and civic amenities was treated as pursuing a public utility object, so its sale proceeds, rent, interest and cess did not by themselves amount to trade, commerce or business. The proviso to section 2(15) was therefore held inapplicable and exemption under section 11 remained available. Amounts placed in the Infrastructure Development Reserve Fund were regarded as earmarked for approved development projects, and the alleged section 13(1)(c) read with section 13(3) violation was not established on the facts. Once exemption was allowed, the remaining disallowances became academic and were not separately sustained. en-us Thu, 10 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 21 Mar 2022 11:20:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419848 A statutory development authority engaged in planned urban development, housing, roads and civic amenities was treated as pursuing a public utility object, so its sale proceeds, rent, interest and cess did not by themselves amount to trade, commerce or business. The proviso to section 2(15) was therefore held inapplicable and exemption under section 11 remained available. Amounts placed in the Infrastructure Development Reserve Fund were regarded as earmarked for approved development projects, and the alleged section 13(1)(c) read with section 13(3) violation was not established on the facts. Once exemption was allowed, the remaining disallowances became academic and were not separately sustained. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 10 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419848